Centerfield

The Political Animal

When Aristotle proclaimed in Nichomachean Ethics that "only the many can come together to form the political... and man is the political animal." he created the basic world view which Centrists still hold today: we are all united in our common destiny as part of one nation, though each individual has his own particular interests. He explains that politics is the art of "combining all of the other arts to produce the greater good". It is the aim of politics, in Aristotle's view, to take the many different interests and combine them together into one greater whole. By doing this, he planted the seeds of a political philosophy which is resurgant in American political life, and which is now, again, finding its voice.

For much of the 20th century, Centrism seemed to be a philosophy of "neither left nor right", but this is an artifact of the modern era: a period where change and chaos seemed so unmanageble that, as Centerfield writer Rick Heller puts it: it seemed that centrism was "between two great mountains on the left and the right." And yet, I would wager that a large fraction of the American electorate - if offered a three party system with left, right and center - would be active and vocal members of a centrist party, it was what appealed to people in the idea of the "Reform" party. Clinton tacked back and forth to be seen as a centrist.

But we do not have such a system, and centrists are often feel they must weigh between which side will have too much authority in the present, and which group of experts will have too much influence. Rather than having a conversation on the political, it seems as if politics has become a few people trying to walk a tight rope: giving power to one side or another for just long enough to do what needs to be done.

But for most of political history, seeking the center was a political philosophy itself, finding the point of consensus and using rational and reasonable means to reach that consensus a strong political notion. It drives, for example, Niccolo Machiavelli's ideas on republican government: that vigorous people's guided by civic virtue would use the whole spectrum of institutions - military, political and religious - to retain their liberty. His emphasis on virtu, often called "virtue" but better translated as "will", and on balancing competing forces - being neither two generous in spending, nor too aggressive in war, being neither too prone to seek alliances, nor unwilling to make them when needed - is a program for sound government from the center of society.

This is why Americans want someone they see as a centrist, not because they want an average between left and right, but because holding elective office is about making decisions. And Americans, in the end, more than ideology, want efficacy. We would rather have pragmatism over purity. McCain is such an iconic figure among centrists - despite his conservative record as a Senator - because he presents us with a man who could make the right decision, and make that decision stick. Centrism is, at its base, the philosophy that politics is about making the right decision, and carrying it out the right way.

It is, after all, the idea of "the greatest good for the greatest number" which stands at any central coalition. The idea that reason and rationality would allow to choose "moderation" as an active idea, not merely the average between extremes. And it is Aristotle's argument that politics is the art of combining other arts that forms the basis for the Centrist program - to acknowledge that there are many sources of ideas, some ideologically driven, others the result of study, and some based on emotional intuition - but that it is the essential activity of American political discourse to coordinate all of the sources of ideas into a coherent program which commands broad support.

This fundamental shift - from averaging or dividing between extremes - and towards the active process of creating consensus, coherency and, yes, a center upon which policy rests - has already begun. By realizing that Centrism is not merely reaction against excesses of the extremes, excesses of rhetoric, or excess in pursuing a supposed good to its absurd limits - but is, instead, rooted in the long history of political and ethical philosophy - Centrists gain access to a whole political vocabulary and arsenal of quotions and ideas. Not merely Aristotle, but Erasmus, Machiavelli, Spinoza, Voltaire, Madison, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt - men who were not "left" or "right", but seeking a humane and enlightened center to public life, not merely averaging, but balancing, the competing forces in society - between labor and capital, religion and civic society, between competing factions, between pure rationality and emotional intuition.

This also liberates the burden of centrism from spending overly much time attacking the excesses of left and right. It is more important to remove excessive influence on the political system by those who would restrict civil liberties in the name of religious principles, than it is to remove "In God We Trust" from our money. It is more important to end poverty, than to attempt to determine to exactly what degree that poverty is caused by being the descendants of enslaved Africans. It is more important than we have an economy that works, rather than one which meets some arbitrary definition of systematic purity. Instead, the entire nature of extreme rhetoric can be exposed for what it is: shrill, and internally inconsistent. Centrism then, becomes the philosophy of standards: which standards to apply in which cases to reach a decision.

Instead, it is time for Centrists to assert that the reason so many political figures and philosophers of the past do not fit easily into the boxes of "left" and "right", is that they were, in their time and for ours, centrists, seeking a place to stand upon, so that they could move the earth.

So Centrism rests on a positive program, rooted in the idea that each individual discipline must be balanced by an active drive to combine all of the available resources, and utilize ideas, from whatever source, to produce the greatest good. It has a long history and a deep tradition in the ideas of reason and rationality - which is, after all, why most extreme philosophies must either attack human reason all together, or claim a "scientific" basis for their conclusions which crowds out all other viewpoints. It is time for Centrists to reclaim their heritage, and actively promote centrism, not as the remainder between two parties, but as being in a line of succession that stretches back to the birth of Western thought, and whose luminaries are known to almost all.

Rick Heller has graciously invited to blog here - and I hope over the coming weeks to spend time examining some of the great ideas of Centrism in the past, and how, by an active use of reason, we can extend these ideas into the present - to argue for a new rationality in politics, and a political philosophy of combining all of the energy and ability in American society.